LNER Doncaster - Gresley, the streamliners and all that jazz

[LNER4479]

More tracklaying ...

 

Working on the third out of four fan of points in the fiddle yard.

 

And that's the down fiddle yard essentially done - just a few plain lengths to complete.

 

A ten coach set of Hornby Gresleys looks suitably 'lost' in there. The longest road as laid will take a 19 coach train - answers on a postcard(!) More prosaically, each road will be set up to take two trains if required, so more likely a longer road would be used to store two (shorter) trains, with a longer formation occupying one road on its own.

 

One more fiddle yard session probably ... then we switch to Peco bullhead for the track through the station 🤓

[LNER4479]

Latest report is a combination of two visits - the first was curtailed due to a ... er ... industrial injury 🤕 

 

Anyhow, here's work on the last ladder of points in the fiddle yard, the Up entrance points, seen here temporarily laid out top left.

 

And now laid out for keeps, with the down exit line being installed beneath.

 

Meanwhile, down at the other end of the room, further baseboard construction.

 

And thus we have the final board in place for Doncaster station itself 🙂 It's quite a long way down to the other end.

 

With this progress, we're within an ace of starting to lay track in the scenic area. So this stretch of cork has been painted, in preparation. This is the south end junctions board.

 

Next visit, hopefully 🤓

 

 

[AndyB]

Just a thought based on my own experience.

 

Where you've got baseboards supported by kitchen units I'd recommend seeking ways to reinforce these.

 

Sadly I discovered how cheap and flaky kitchen unit chipboard actually was. 

Over a handful of years they deteriorated,  either through damp or over loading. Essentially they pulled themselves to pieces.

 

I ripped them all out and built solid benchwork. The contents went into stackable plastic boxes that slide underneath.

 

I'd hate for this very ambitious layout to suffer the same fate mine did!

 

All the best. Andy

[gr.king]

1 hour ago, AndyB said:

Just a thought based on my own experience.

 

Where you've got baseboards supported by kitchen units I'd recommend seeking ways to reinforce these.

 

Sadly I discovered how cheap and flaky kitchen unit chipboard actually was. 

Over a handful of years they deteriorated,  either through damp or over loading. Essentially they pulled themselves to pieces.

 

I ripped them all out and built solid benchwork. The contents went into stackable plastic boxes that slide underneath.

 

I'd hate for this very ambitious layout to suffer the same fate mine did!

 

All the best. Andy

I would be concerned on that score too. Not a fan of chipboard for anything structural.  I also don't trust softwood rails for baseboard framing - it is not inherently stable, if it wants to warp, it will, and you don't normally get the opportunity to choose thoroughly seasoned, knot-free, straight grained wood from the optimum part of the tree.

I prefer to make the horizontal rails supporting my baseboards from a reasonable thickness of hard plywood, sawn into straight-edged strips, and used "on edge". I've recently used 9mm ply in strips about 3" wide for frames up to 4 feet long. I use softwood only for corner blocks in the frames, and for legs.

[LNER4479]

13 hours ago, AndyB said:

Where you've got baseboards supported by kitchen units I'd recommend seeking ways to reinforce these.

 

 

11 hours ago, gr.king said:

I would be concerned on that score too. Not a fan of chipboard for anything structural.  I also don't trust softwood rails for baseboard framing - it is not inherently stable, if it wants to warp, it will, and you don't normally get the opportunity to choose thoroughly seasoned, knot-free, straight grained wood from the optimum part of the tree.

Thanks for comments / concerns.

 

FWIW

 

The room is an inside room, ie no wall is an outside wall. So it's inherently dry and pretty constant temperature in there.

 

Layout is only partly supported by the units; rest is conventional legs (3 x 1) as you can see. These areas are designed so as to be able to store the plastic boxes beneath, as you describe

 

Lengthways, longitudinal beams are also 3 x 1. Bought in a pack of 4 from a well-known DIY store, of orange hue (other DIY stores are available). Yesterday, I opened a new pack (itself chosen from others in the rack as being the best I could see) and selected the two straightest and truest to be the longitudinal beams. They were dead straight and true to my eye. They'd also been in the room for a month and thus had time to adjust to the climate.

 

I do use 9mm ply for similar beams on my exhibition layouts, where weight is a consideration. These (Doncaster) boards are designed to be removable if required which is also influencing the method of construction.

 

I'll keep my eye on things but no concerns so far (although I do understand that some of the effects you describe are of a more longer term nature).

 

[ITG]

I am using kitchen units for storage under my under-construction layout, but being concerned about ease of under-board access, I mounted each cupboard unit on casters, and the layout board itself is ply-framed on a mixture of legs and battens. Legs are spaced to allow a cupboard unit to be rolled out if needed.

Ian

[Dominion]

I notice you mentioned earlier you planned to have the ability to run DC for Mark’s unchipped locos.

 

I do that too. I would suggest making it one loop only and not even the associated storage loops. Otherwise it means all the DCC locos on sections that might become DC should be removed and it becomes a bit of a faff if you have lots of locos in loops. 

 

In turn that would mean adding insulation gaps at the end of the stock rails of turnouts in fans that might otherwise bridge the DC switchable and DCC permanent loops. I mention this as in normal DC or DCC wiring you would not have to insulate outer rails of fans, and I missed it when first laying my storage loops. It may be too late as it looks like you have laid several of those turnouts already but may still be easier to do sooner rather than later. 

 

Having the switchable loop is also very useful for running-in locos before fitting a decoder. 
Tom

[PaulRhB]

4 hours ago, Dominion said:

Otherwise it means all the DCC locos on sections that might become DC should be removed

No reason to remove DCC fitted locos as all modern chips are quite happy on DC, (the inverse applies to DC locos on DCC sections to prevent the AC overheating motors).

If you’ve set a long address they may not run unless you enable DC again but that’s just because it ignores the DC and is for its benefits when running on DCC. 

[gr.king]

Is the actual objection on account of the fact that any areas wired with consideration for DCC operation only will (or may) have "everything live, all the time", and therefore no places in which a (DCC fitted, or other) loco operable on DC will be able to stand "dead" when a DC power supply is being used?

Edited April 14 by gr.king
Clarification

[Dominion]

Mmm, you have me wondering now. Like many things on the layout I did it so long ago I am struggling to remember the specifics of why I did something a certain way. I agree you certainly need to protect DC locos from DCC power. Also I did not want any stationary stock to accidentally be able to bridge the two power sources, as I do sometimes run a DC loco on its loop while the rest of the layout is DCC powered and operating. 
But I agree you can set CV29 in the decoders to not respond to DC, which I routinely do when I first configure them. 
I am now definitely scratching my head as to why I have been removing the DCC locos from that loop and why I thought it was best to separate the storage loops from the DC switchable running lines  where I could. Perhaps it has just become an old habit !

Paul are you saying some old decoders were not happy on DC ? I do have some locos I fitted a very long time ago so perhaps that was the issue. 

[LNER4479]

14 hours ago, Dominion said:

I notice you mentioned earlier you planned to have the ability to run DC for Mark’s unchipped locos.

 

I mention this as in normal DC or DCC wiring you would not have to insulate outer rails of fans, and I missed it when first laying my storage loops. It may be too late as it looks like you have laid several of those turnouts already but may still be easier to do sooner rather than later. 

 

 

7 hours ago, gr.king said:

Is the actual objection on account of the fact that any areas wired with consideration for DCC operation only will (or may) have "everything live, all the time", and therefore no places in which a (DCC fitted, or other) loco operable on DC will be able to stand "dead" when a DC power supply is being used?

All very much in the forefront of our minds at the present time!

 

Firstly, I've been putting double insulators in everywhere with the idea that only the train you want to drive will be live. An overriding factor is that the loops being laid will eventually be hidden from view (either partially or totally) so there needs to be a certain amount of automation in terms of stopping and starting trains.

 

Whilst we'll have DCC to drive the trains, we won't be using it to change points, etc. That'll be conventional electrics, push buttons, relays, etc - we're as one with that. Just a preference, but one I'm comfortable with in terms of being within my competence.

 

Each (of the four) circuits will be a 'district' and switchable between DCC and DC. There are many locos(!) and it will be a long process to chip them all. In fact, there's probably some kit built ones that will never get chipped!

Edited April 14 by LNER4479

[PaulRhB]

On 14/04/2024 at 11:03, Dominion said:

Paul are you saying some old decoders were not happy on DC ? I do have some locos I fitted a very long time ago so perhaps that was the issue. 

A long time ago yes but the majority from the last 15-20 years also do dc.